They are busy using microscopes and calculators trying work this out. Because the area has been water washed after the hydrocarbons left, there will probably have been new mineralisation. So it's not that simple to work out what the permeability and porosity would have been like originally.
The gas influx for Likonde is also not quantifed. A small amount of gas at circa 3700m will be a large amount at surface over the shakers. Enough to scare you , but no data on commerciallity. If it had been significant I would imagine that they would have persevered and tried to quantify the gas,suggesting it was the oil they really wanted.
They were alert for potential gas problem when drilling the last section. They stopped when the gas influx was 100% [of what?] and dumped in heavier mud. At this point they were just at TD and were about to stop anyway.
It is industry practice to only call something a gas discovery if hydrocarbons are recovered to the surface - this didn't happen as it was too dangerous. Because nothing flowed to the surface they have no ideas about flow or whether it would have been maintained. They stopped because it was too dangerous, not because they weren't interested in gas or to put a better gloss on a result.
'That' RNS mentioned residual hydrocarbons. Does this mean that hydrocarbons have migrated through the zone of interest and failed to be trapped?
There was a good seal but the trap was breached/sprung
Do they need to rework their assumptions about the trap. How is such work progressing?
They now know that trap integrity (not source etc) will be the major risk for the next well, expected 2011. So they will be studying that aspect of the possible locations very hard. Work ongoing.-
High gas was influx reported. How does that square with 'residual' hydrocarbons? Is there a seal between one or more zones?
yes there is a seal between the upper areas, where first a large residual gas section then a residual oil section were found, and the lower section where the gas influx came from
沒有留言:
張貼留言